On Jul 9, 2009, at 2:25 AM, Hugh Glaser <h...@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
On 09/07/2009 00:38, "Toby A Inkster" <t...@g5n.co.uk> wrote:
On 8 Jul 2009, at 19:58, Seth Russell wrote:
Is it not true that everything past the hash (#alice) is not
transmitted back to the server when a browser clicks on a
hyperlink ? If that is true, then the server would not be able to
serve anything different if a browser clicked upon http://
example.com/foaf.rdf or if they clicked upon http://example.com/
foaf.rdf#alice .
Indeed - the server doesn't see the fragment.
If that is true, and it probably isn't, then is not the Semantic
Web crippled from using that techniqe to distinguish between
resources and at the same time hyper linking between those
different resources?
Not at all.
Is the web of documents crippled because the server can't distinguish
between requests for http://example.com/document.html and http://
example.com/document.html#part2 ? Of course it isn't - the server
doesn't need to distinguish between them - it serves up the same web
page either way and lets the user agent distinguish.
Hash URIs are very valuable in linked data, precisely *because* they
can't be directly requested from a server - they allow us to bypass
the whole HTTP 303 issue.
Mind you, it does mean that you should make sure that you don't put
too many
LD URIs in one document.
If dbpedia decided to represent all the RDF in one document, and
then use
hash URIs, it would be somewhat problematic.
Could you explain why???
--
Toby A Inkster
<mailto:m...@tobyinkster.co.uk>
<http://tobyinkster.co.uk>
